Talk:Chaffee type shuttlepod
This is a page to discuss the suggestion to delete " ". *If you are suggesting a page for deletion, add your initial rationale to the section "Deletion rationale". *If you want to discuss this suggestion, add comments to the section "Discussion". *If a consensus has been reached, an administrator will explain the final decision in the section "Admin resolution". In all cases, please make sure to read and understand the deletion policy before editing this page. Deletion rationale "Type 10" and "shuttlecraft" are from DS9 Tech Manual. Dialogue in "The Sound of Her Voice" clearly designates the Chaffee as a shuttlePOD, not a shuttle craft, nor is "Type 10" designation mentioned. I have already duplicated the necessary background information re: "Type 10 shuttlecraft" and it's sourcing regards Chaffee to the "Chaffee" page background section, where it should be.Capt Christopher Donovan 06:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC) Discussion Strong oppose. There is a lot of useful editing history in this article. This should be a merge, not a delete. --OuroborosCobra talk 06:16, 2 December 2007 (UTC) :Strong oppose. Perhaps the article should be renamed to "Type 10 shuttlepod" if it was referred to as such in dialogue,(although I believe shuttlepods have been called shuttlecraft before, so that doesn't mean much) but it should not be deleted. I oppose a merge.--31dot 12:36, 2 December 2007 (UTC) ::Comment "Type 10" NOT from episode, ONLY from Tech Manual and Starship Spotter. POD is spoken, not craft in dialogue. Canon trumps non-canon/secondary, correct? Seems to me to be open and shut case, unless you want to change the canon policy.Capt Christopher Donovan 12:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC) :I agreed with your point about what trumps what by saying that it should be renamed to shuttlepod.(assuming people simply did not misspeak) Unless something contradicts the 'type-10" reference, I see no reason to remove that. --31dot 13:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC) :::Assuming it is just the name that is non-canon, then definitely don't delete. Move to some other title, as for example Defiant shuttlepod (first thing that came to mind, there may be a better one) and be done with it. -- Cid Highwind 20:43, 2 December 2007 (UTC) Maybe even Chaffee type shuttlepod. --OuroborosCobra talk 20:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC) Comment. Isn't Tech Manual a permitted source, as long as we say that it is referenced from the it?--Rom UlanHail 21:40, 2 December 2007 (UTC) ::Only for background information, not for naming an entire article. --OuroborosCobra talk 21:50, 2 December 2007 (UTC) ::::Ok. But still, i will vote Oppose. Maybee a merge with Chaffee, but not just delete it.--Rom UlanHail 21:56, 2 December 2007 (UTC) :::::I support either Merging and redirecting (as a non-canon redirect) or changing the title, but definitely don't delete. – Cleanse 23:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::Strongly oppose. We accept a more broad level of information in the naming of articles. If the Defiant has a new class of shuttle/pod, we should have a page about them. That page needs a name. So I think its reasonable to find that name in sources not necessarily seen on screen. Otherwise, we wouldn't have name for that *VAST* majority of articles on memory alpha. Hossrex 00:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC) ::Effectively, when I duplicated the necessary background information to "Chaffee", what I did was an information merge. Some have indicated that there is information in the "edititng history" they think should be preserved. I would support a merge/redirect with/to "Chaffee" on that basis, whichever would satisfy the historical concerns better.Capt Christopher Donovan 00:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Hossrex, can you provide an example of an article with a name not stated on screen with the exception of the "X type" classes (which in fact are based on screen information)? --OuroborosCobra talk 00:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Madison_Picard -- Hossrex 02:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Talk:Jesus_Christ http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Ba%27ku_llama http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Maltz ::I would submit that that first article needs to go or be fixed too...ZERO canon citation (at least provided). The others at least have onscreen visual or verbal support.Capt Christopher Donovan 03:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC) :::::: From Shran, in the Saavik talk page "Well, the canon policy explains why we only use script info to name articles, but the only exception is for naming purposes. -- Hossrex 03:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC) The script isn't the Encyclopedia or Tech Manual. The script has a direct relationship to the on screen product. Calling something a Llama is hardly anything like making up a technical designatiion for a shuttlepod. --OuroborosCobra talk 03:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC) ::::::http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Dreadnought_%28type%29 With enough time, I could find dozens. You can say "we shouldn't allow this now, for whatever reason", but to imply we've never done this is flatly incorrect. I've seen them, I've commented on them, I remember them. They exist. -- Hossrex 03:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Admin resolution